\& 831 
.K3 
Copy 1 



THE MENACE OF 
THE MILLIONAIRE 



OR 

IF I HAD A 
MILLION 



RICHARD D. KATHRENS 



BURTON PUBLISHING COMPANY 

PUBLISHERS AND BOOKSELLERS 
KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 



I still maintain that the man with 
vast sums of money — not earned by 
himself, perhaps — is a menace to the 
rights and opportunities of thousands, 
and the law should provide some sane 
and practical means whereby the man 
of small capital, or no capital, might 
find protection against the avarice and 
the unjust aggression of a rich and 
powerful competitor. 



The Menace Of The Nillionaire 



OS 



If I Had A Million 



BY 

RICHARD D. KATHRENS 

AUTHOE or 

'L«t'i Civilize The Marriage Laws," "What God Hath 
Joined," "Hath Sin a Sex?" etc., etc. 



PUBLISHED BY 

BuBTON Publishing Company 

KANSAS CITY, MO. 

1914 



\\ i^ '6^ 



Copyrighted 1914 

BY 

Richard D. Kathrens 



©CLA871403 

APR !5 1914 



THE MENACE OF THE 

MILLIONAIRE 
— GR- 
IP I HAD A MILLION. 

What would you do if you had a mil- 
lion dollars? 

Every person who has reached the 
age of maturity, and who has taken note 
of the conditions that exist about him 
in society, has asked or has been asked 
this same question ; and everyone has at 
some time, either seriously or flippantly, 
indicated the special benefactions he 
would indulge and the good he would 
dispense, if he were the possessor of 
a fortune. The views, theories and 
schemes thus advanced are for the most 
part without value, owing to the circum- 
scribed horizon that hedges about the 
mental activity of the average man, and 
the limited amount of real knowledge 



possessed by him. But the world pro- 
gresses, economically., in the degree that 
men question the sufficiency of prevail- 
ing systems to meet the common needs 
of the individual, and to indicate where- 
in improvement or advance may be had 
■ — and how. All human problems are 
finally solved in just that way, and man 
grows in mental and moral excellence 
by asking and answering questions. 
There is a grain of gold in every man's 
opinion, if we will find it; and in the 
aggregate of opinions the world's wis- 
dom finds expression. It remains for 
the analytical mind to assay the great 
mass of more or less crude notions, as- 
sumptions, conjectures, plans, etc., that 
may be put forth from time to time in 
solution of any problem — to measure 
them by the accepted yard sticks of 
science — to submit them to the acid and 
fire tests of known facts — to boil them 
down, so to speak — to separate the ore 
from the dross — the truth from the false 
— and to furnish us, free from awkward 
and involved verbiage, the completed, 
composite thought of multitudes of 
minds upon any subject. This is the 



refining process by which dreams some- 
times come true. 

Among the many privileges which 
the present era accords to every man is 
the right to think, and to freely express 
just what he thinks, although his opin- 
ions and conjectures controvert the the- 
ories and overturn the accepted hypoth- 
eses of centuries. Of course the respon- 
sibility runs same as heretofore. He 
who attempts to attack fixed custom, 
intrenched privilege, or long settled re- 
ligious convictions, need not hope to 
escape payment in full for his moral 
hardihood; and he who essays to pub- 
lich^ discuss questions of general con- 
cern, must be willing to receive upon his 
own head the full measure of public 
favor or condemnation. 

But, men were never, as now, so will- 
ing to listen; never, as now, so amenable 
to reason; never, as now, so tolerant of 
the views of others; and the man with 
a message worth delivering need not hes- 
itate to speak out. He will have no dif- 
ficulty securing a forum ; and if he 
speaks the truth — a following. It mat- 
ters little about his past; his personal 



life, his ancestry, his nationality, his 
present standing in the business world, 
or the particular brand of his religious 
predilection — the important thing is the 
practical and rational value of the re- 
form he urges. 

The world is ready to part company 
with superstition in every form; to for- 
sake error and falsity, under whatever 
guise; and to accept the truth — by 
whomsoever uttered — provided only 
that it can be demonstrated. 

With this preface, I return to my 
opening query: What would you do if 
you had a million dollars? 

A simple question; anyone might pro- 
pound it, and seemingly anybody should 
be able to readily answer — but the cor- 
rect answer to that question probably 
carries with it an easy solution for most 
of the problems of the hour, and an ef- 
fective remedy for most of the ills that 
afflict the existing social order. 

What would you do? 

What use would you make of such 
a fortune to better the world, or to 
ameliorate the hard conditions of so- 
ciety? For my part, I must confess, I 

8 



am hardly willing to trust myself to 
make answer. 

It would be quite impossible, in my 
opinion, for any man unacquainted with 
the sensations and responsibilities that 
go along with the ownership of a million 
of money, to forecast just what would 
be the attitude of his mind towards the 
facts of life, if such a fortune should 
come to him. Indeed, it would be a 
mere guess — the veriest speculation. 

It would be much easier for me to 
enumerate some of the things that I 
would not do, if I had a million, and felt 
disposed as I now feel to help my fel- 
low; but, by this process of elimination 
a wise and proper course may suggest 
itself. 

Let's pursue the plan. 

My judgment does not approve the 
wisdom of following any of the usual 
avenues through which modern philan- 
thropy finds expression. My opposition 
to all these schemes and systems of in- 
tended usefulness is aroused because of 
their insufficiency and their palpable 
impracticability, and because they fail 
utterly to overcome or ,to remove any 



of the conditions they are designed to 
remed3^ 

I would not be pursuaded, if I had a 
million dollars, to give any part of it to 
build a church, or for the extension of 
any form of church work. 

It is a question, in my mind, if the 
church has rendered to mankind a serv- 
ice at all commensurate with the cost 
and burden it has imposed. The building 
and support of vast ecclesiastical estab- 
lishments, the financing of expensive 
])roselyting expeditions, the prosecution 
of wars in the name of religion, the 
spreading over the earth of unsettling, 
confusing and conflicting notions con- 
cerning man's mission and destiny, and 
the maintenance, in comparative idle- 
ness, of hundreds of thousands of non- 
producers — all these things which sum 
up the church, have exacted an enor- 
mous tribute from the earnings of men; 
and I say it is a question of grave doubt 
and one certainly open to honest in- 
(juiry, if any adequate return has been 
made, directly or indirectly, to those 
who have borne this burden. 

I do not address myself to the reader's 

10 



prejudice, and I do not wish to attack, or 
even seem to attack any of the precon- 
ceived opinions he may entertain about 
the church or religion, but rather I would 
ask his dispassionate consideration of 
the church, as one of the agencies of our 
civilization. 

The spiritual uplift, so-called, afforded 
by the church, is to no purpose, and of 
no value to society, unless it extends to 
and affects beneficially the relations and 
conditions of men — unless it promotes 
harmony, good will, mutual helpfulness, 
the material prosperity and the physical 
•^^rfection of the members of society. 
If the church cannot show a record of 
achievement in these essentials of moral 
and social advancement, then in all fair- 
ness — judged by its fruits the church 
has failed of its purpose. 

For nearly 2,000 years the church has 
posed as the special and divinely ap- 
pointed conservator of public morals, 
and yet among its members, and w»t-hiu 
its councils, have appeared thp mn^t Hpr.. 
potic, brutal and despicable monsters 
whose atrocious activities have black- 
ened the pages of history; and, in those 

11 



sections of the world where today the 
church enjoys the largest measure of 
temporal power, human progress is less 
marked, illiteracy is more universal, pov- 
erty more abject and hpoeless, and crime 
shows no diminution. If the church 
could say, in defense of the adequacy 
of its system to remedy the ills of 
societ}': "Witness the transformation 
wrought by the church! When we came 
into the world and into the hearts of 
men, disease and poverty and crime 
cursed the fair earth, but now, behold! 
Twenty centuries of the salutary min- 
istrations of the church have forever 
cleansed the world of this trinity of hor- 
rors, and made of the earth a paradise, 
indeed, where dwell in love and fellow- 
ship the sons of men!" If the church 
could lay claim to such an accomplish- 
ment, I should favor any and every plan 
for the extension and perpetuation of 
its institutions. 

But there is another reason why I 
would not contribute money for church 
purposes. 

It has been my observation that the 
men who do these things are not always 

X2 



normal, fully-rounded men, but as a rule 
are vain, hypocritical, narrow or blindly 
bigoted men. If there appears to be, 
in your acquaintance, an exception to 
this rule, then it is safe to wag-er that 
you are being deceived by appearances. 
The man who gives money for "the glory 
of God" is rarely unmindful of his own 
glorification. Then, I think a man is 
without justification who takes that 
which does not belong to him and 
•gives it to the "service of God." In 
other words, so long as there exists in 
the world sorrow and want; so long as 
devoted mothers and helpless children 
•suffer for the bare necessities; so long 
as good men are required to wear away 
useful lives in an unequal struggle for 
bread — God should be willing to wait. 
I would not give money for the build- 
ing of free libraries, on the mistaken 
and misapplied theory that "knowledge 
will make you free." If the people are 
too poor to buy Plato or Balzac or 
Shakespeare or Darwin, for ten cents, 
then it is certain the people need some- 
thing else more imperatively than they 
need free books. 

13 



The free library fails of its beneficent 
purpose. Its advantages are reserved for 
the few, and these benefits are largely 
monopolized by those who can well af- 
ford to pay. The free library does not 
serve the book needs of the dependent, 
and it does not satisfy the yearning for 
wisdom that may inflame the heart of 
him who is too poor to buy. It rather 
caters to the fancy, the emotionalism, or 
the romanticism of the well-to-do. It 
provides pastime and recreation for the 
frivolous, the vain and the indolent. The 
child of poverty — mean and shabbily 
clad — turns back at the mosaic entrance. 
With an intensified sense of the fitness 
of things, he realizes that the free libra- 
ries are not for such as he; and the con- 
tumely of the gay throng, passing in 
and out, bar the way to his opportunity 
as completely as would gates and locks 
of steel. 

I would not encourage, with my 
money, the building of great schools or 
the endowment of colleges. These in- 
stitutions, as at present conducted, are 
practically closed to the children of the 
poor, thus working an unjust discrim- 

14 



ination against the multitude. The in- 
fluence of the big school is distinctly 
destructive of democratic ideals, and 
makes for the division of society into 
classes. 

I would not concern myself much 
about perpetuating the "homes" and 
"shelters" and "settlements" provided 
for the relief of a few of the unfortunates 
who fall victims of the cruel, so-called 
Christian system under which we live. 
All these schemes of comfort and succor 
are deficient, and deal their charity with 
partial hand. 

The care of the aged, and the indigent 
cripple, who are incapacitated by the in- 
firmities of years or physical handicaps 
to make their own way, would awaken 
my interest; likewise, the victim of in- 
curable or wasting disease, and I should 
feel warranted in contributing my share 
to their support and comfort. But, such 
action on my part would be prompted 
more by a desire to relieve a known con- 
dition of distress, demanding immediate 
succor, than by a willingness to tem- 
porize with the evils in our system that 
furnish these public charges faster than 

15 



they can be cared for. The various 
charities devised to meet the appalHng 
condition of society that confronts us 
on every hand, fall woefully short of 
their purpose. They deal with symp- 
toms only and hence fail utterly to reach 
•the cause that lies back of the distress 
they are designed to alleviate. 

The student of the situation, indeed 
the most indifferent observer must note 
that the crying need — the imperative de- 
mand everywhere — is money, money! 

The deeper we pursue the subject our 
analysis discloses a direct relation be- 
tween poverty and nearly all forms of 
crime; between poverty and nearly all 
forms of disease, and the further fact 
that the indigence and pauperism that 
mock our civilization and threaten our 
national life, are the legitimate product 
of a perverted governmental system that 
supinely permits a criminally imequal 
distribution of wealth. 

To the man with a million, possessed 
by a sincere desire to do real and last- 
ing good for his fellow man, these facts 
should afford inspiration, and should 
suggest to him a course of action which, 

16 



if wisely pursued, would accomplish the 
greatest good for the greatest number. 

He might address himself to the task 
of devising some plan, or developing 
some equitable scheme whereby the 
State might effectually discourage 
"swollen fortunes." The amassing and 
concentrating of money, beyond a cer- 
tain amount — deemed by experience and 
a concensus of public opinion, to be suf- 
ficient to supply every reasonable de- 
mand — should be made to entail a cer- 
tain hazard (created by law) that would 
automatically operate to reduce and dis- 
burse such excess accumulations. 

The scattered millions of money 
which yesterday ministered to the needs 
and comforts of thousands, gathered to- 
day into one hand, make a slave of their 
owner — infect his activity with a per- 
nicious quality — and become a menace to 
the rights and opportunities of hundreds 
of thousands. 

The gravest danger in this country 
today — indeed the most alarming and 
destructive influence that has arisen in 
the history of free governments, is the 
modern man of millions. The accumu- 

17 



lation of vast hordes of money, or the 
convertable equivalent of money, under 
a single control is the most unfortunate 
and calamitous development of this 
period. A majority of the ills of society 
can be traced directly to the system 
which permits one man, or one set of 
men, to employ their surplus w^ealth for 
their further private aggrandisement, at 
the expense of the other members of so- 
ciety. The fact that a multi-millionaire 
is possible in this land augurs the insta- 
bility of the republic. The development 
here of such a parasitic growth is a seri- 
ous commentary on our institutions. 
The multi-millionaire serves no good 
purpose ; gauged by every standard, and 
from every point of view, he is a calam- 
ity. Despite the possible charm of his 
personality — his kindly mein, his gra- 
cious manner, his genial comradeship ; 
despite the largesse of his heart — the 
multiplicity of his charities, the quiet, 
unostentatious method of his giving, and 
the thoughtful and practical value of his 
benefactions — nevertheless, the multi- 
millionaire is a positive menace. With- 
out wishing to be — even without know- 

18 



ing it, he is rendered — by virtue of the 
subtle power of his money — an enemy 
of society, and the foe of popular gov- 
ernment. His very presence is a threat; 
and his activity is a hindrance and an 
obstruction to the industry of others. 
His financial superiority serves to check 
personal initiative, to discourage com- 
petition, and accomplishes the despair 
of the poor! 

So, if I had a million dollars, I would 
favor with my fortune the fixing by law 
of a defined limit to the individual own- 
ership of money — a limit beyond which 
no man would be permitted to prey 
upon the earnings of his fellow. 

Why? 

Because Money means Power; and a 
concentration of money means a cen- 
tralization of power, which in turn 
means the circumscription of rights and 
the abridgment of opportunities; and 
that which interferes with the full en- 
joyment of all the natural rights of the 
individual, or which tends to destroy the 
equality of opportunity — for all alike — 
means disadvantage and disaster for 
those whose privileges are cut off or 

19 



curtailed. Such a condition can have 
but one outcome, and that is class dis- 
tinction, and eventually — Master and 
Slave. 

If every man who owns or controls 
large sums of money were an honest 
man, a conscientious man, a man imbued 
with high principles — indeed, if every 
man who acquires the use and admin- 
istration of a fortune, were considerate 
always of the rights of his neighbor 
and controlled at all times by a sincere 
and absorbing desire to serve his fellow 
— this old world would be a very much 
more desirable place in which to live, 
and few would be willing to leave it, 
even though assured through transpor- 
tation and a clear title to mansion in 
the sky. 

But, alas ! man is very much the same 
sort of an animal today that he was in 
the stone age, some fifty thousand years 
ago. He has lost somewhat, perhaps, 
of his native brutality — and yet I am not 
so sure about that. His ideals, prob- 
ably, have become more fanciful and ex- 
travagant, but they are not above the 
gratification of the senses; his Utopia 

20 



is still an undiscovered country, and the 
Millennium for which he has yearned, is 
still a vague, impalpable dream. He has 
not changed much in principle, or in his 
moral conception of things, but he has 
learned how to mask his motives, and 
some of his ancient methods have been 
revised. He is not above shifting re- 
sponsibility, or shirking his duty, only 
he does it now without exposing his 
head or barking his own shins. Hypoc- 
risy and deceit and cant and scientific 
dissimulation are the cunning devices 
with which he betrays, and destroys, and 
— escapes detection. 

A certain culture, or gloss, serves to 
indicate an advance along various lines, 
but the poor are still preyed upon by 
the rich; the defenseless are still op- 
pressed by those in power; the weak are 
victims of the strong; the fallen cry for 
mercy, but they are spurned and tram- 
pled on; and, every man is seeking out 
his own salvation, and rarely fails to 
take advantage of his neighbor's misfor- 
tune for his own profit or advancement. 

The old tiger spirit still dominates: 
the hearts of men are not yet civilized! 

21 



Great wealth, in the hands of a few, 
is the burden of this hour — the king 
curse of this age. This cannot be too 
strongly emphasized. The concenter- 
ing of huge fortunes that we witness in 
this country is inconsistent with the 
spirit of free institutions; is inimical 
to the life and purpose of a democracy, 
and is a contradiction of the declara- 
tions and hopes of a liberty loving peo- 
ple. It aims at monarchy — oligarchy. 
Its tendency is towards a centraliza- 
tion of power. It generates a magnet- 
ism that draws all to itself, and it holds 
fast to that which it has. 

And, I want to say here, and with 
all the force at my command: unless 
the people awaken to an appreciation 
of the situation — unless they will rec- 
ognize this great, appalling fact, and 
rise in their sovereign power, and set 
a just restriction upon this business of 
fortune building — the amassing of 
money, beyond any reasonable need; 
the piling of million on million, just 
for the brutal sport of depriving others; 
the heaping and hoarding and entail- 
ing of vast riches, beyond the power of 

22 



the most reckless and dissolute spend- 
thrift to squander — I say, unless the 
people will put a stop to this mad and 
merciless strife for dollars, they will 
have forfeited their birthright; they 
will have failed in their duty to the 
flag; and they will have deserted the 
cause of human freedom! 

We are all more or less selfish, and 
the degree of our selfishness may be 
fairly approximated by the degree of 
our dependence. We are sometimes 
concerned about the rights of our fel- 
low, because our own rights may be 
involved, but just so soon as we be- 
come independent of those about us, 
our attitude changes; we grow formal, 
distant, cold, indifferent. 

The possession of great riches trans- 
forms the man of sentiment and soul 
into an intellectual machine which 
knows neither sympathy nor compas- 
sion, yet quite well simulates a native 
benevolence. 

The master of millions recognizes 
no law above the dollar; and no duty 
to his fellow that interferes with or 
transcends the rights of property. He 

23 



pays only for flattery and sycophancy; 
gives nothing, for the joy of giving, 
but always in response to some ulterior 
motive — a bid for public favor, or an 
opportunity for vainglorious display. 
He doles his charities deliberately, and 
with cold, calculating hand, and he de- 
means and humiliates the object of his 
counterfeit beneficence by exacting a 
slavish obeisance. He measures men 
by his own arbitrary standard — money. 
Worth and ability are gauged by the 
dollars possessed. The man without 
capital is ruthlessly brushed aside as 
of no account, his rights denied and his 
opportunities restricted. 

Great wealth sears the soul, dries up 
the well springs of the heart, thickens 
the skin, cauterizes the nerve-ends, and 
dulls the sensibilities to the pain and 
groans of all — save its own. It seeks 
to wall itself off from the contaminat- 
ing touch of the poor; shuts its ears 
to suffering, closes its eyes to misery, 
and with merry music drowns out the 
cries of woe. Upon the theory that 
"what it does not know, will not hurt 
it," it seeks to make itself secure 

24 



against the intrusion of those things 
that would distract it from the enjoy- 
ment of its own indulgences. 

Great wealth creates privilege, builds 
caste, accentuates class differences and 
breeds an aristocracy that inevitably 
leads to the enslavement of the masses. 

I would not only declaim against 
the multi-millionaire, and abet and 
foster a sentimental antagonism for 
him and his methods, but I would de- 
voutly contend for the success of any 
practical plan that would eliminate and 
eradicate from our social structure, the 
system of which he is the logical out- 
growth. I would set about to secure 
the enactment into law of an Initiative 
Mandate of the People, which should 
define and determine the course of the 
multi-millionaire to the end that the 
passing of this generation would mark 
also the positive and permanent pass- 
ing of these financial monstrosities that 
afflict our social and commercial life. 

And, in pursuance of this purpose, I 
would seek first some popular expres- 
sion upon the question : "When does 
the private ownership of money become 

25 



a menace, and at what point or sum 
would Society—in its own defense— be 
justified in setting a bar to further 
money getting by the individual?" 

To be expected, there would be many 
diverse and conflicting opinions on this 
question. The man who believes, as 
many of our money barons profess to 
beHeve, that lie is the chosen instru- 
ment of Fate, and that leadership — 
without service — is his mission among 
men, will no doubt contend that his 
metliocls are heaven directed, and that 
any restriction of his activities would 
be in the nature of an attempted sub- 
version of the divine plan. 

It does not seem reasonable that any 
man could seriously cherish such a no- 
tion concerning himself or his purpose 
in the world. At any rate, we should 
hardly expect to find him outside the 
most benighted court circles of Con- 
tinental Europe, or in some wild ex- 
travaganza of the stage, and yet a 
large and rapidh^ growing number of 
this sort of creature is to be found in 
the exclusive circles of our excessively 
rich. 

26 



When men acquire immense wealth — 
out of all proportion to their efforts or 
proper deserts — they are frequently 
given to the conceit that they are bet- 
ter than men of less fortune, and are 
likely to ascribe their otherwise (to 
them) unaccountable good luck to some 
special dispensation of the Almighty. 
This is the reall}' dangerous period in 
the moral evolution of the multi-mil- 
lionaire; and, it is against this over- 
weening notion of self, entertained by 
the indolent and title-seeking rich, that 
the common people must maintain a 
watchful lookout — lest their liberties 
become imperiled. 

Another class of people — good and 
patriotic people — but given to super- 
ficial reasoning and chance judgment — 
would disapprove in toto the entire 
scheme of setting any check to fortune 
building. Not because of any possible 
loss they might sustain, or any gain 
they might enjoy, but simply because 
they have not reached that point in ra- 
tional development where the mind per- 
ceives the causal relation between great 
riches on the one hand and great priva- 

27 



tions on the other. 

Still another, and a much larger class 
of people, would favor drawing the line 
so low as to awaken widespread anxiety 
lest the business of the country might 
l)e embarrassed. It would be quite dif- 
ficult to find a common ground on 
which such opposing forces could reach 
a fair compromise, and yet these dif- 
ferences must be reconciled and these 
divergent elements brought together, 
if the ills of which we complain are to 
be remedied. 

If we lived in an ideal society, where 
simple justice was the measure of every 
man's reward, then every man's for- 
tune would represent the money and 
property equivalent of his own labor — 
no more and no less. Under such a per- 
fect system, there would be no "swollen 
fortunes," no millionaires, no rich class, 
and for that very reason there would 
be no jails, almshouses or poor! But, 
that is the millennium, and its realiza- 
tion is so remote that, at best, we may 
only look forward to it as one of the 
possibilities of the dim, distant future. 

Having given some study to the sub- 

28 



ject, and to the equities involved, I may 
be permitted to offer a suggestion that 
may afford at least a basis on which 
to figure a just and practical course. 

I should recommend and urge that 
the maximum limit to the individual 
ownership of money be fixed at a sum 
high enough to satisfy all the rational 
and virtuous requirements of the most 
vaulting ambition; and, at the same 
time a limit low enough, so that no 
single individual could own or control 
exclusively any natural resource, or any 
product of the mine, mill or farm — the 
use of which was essential to the daily 
life or comfort of the people. 

So, in my judgment, the possession 
of one million dollars in money, or 
convertible propery, should mark the 
utmost limit of any man's personal 
holdings. Beyond that generous max- 
imum, the law should provide a penalty 
for the addition of another copper! 

A Million Dollars! What a talisman 
of power; but who knows just what 
those words mean? No two minds 
will accord exactly as to their signifi- 
cance. We all have accustomed our- 

29 



selves to the frequent use of large fig- 
ures, and have acquired a sort of habit 
of sometimes loosely employing such 
terms to convey our idea of values and 
dimensions; but no man can fully and 
completely comprehend just what a 
million means. 

I recall a circumstance that occurred 
in Wyoming, some twenty-odd years 
ago, that may serve to illustrate how 
far short of the facts the mind's eye 
may fall in its measurement of a n'il- 
lion. A number of titled Englishmen, 
including Lord Churchill .tud the Duke 
Oi Mayo, had gone out there to in spec r 
their extensive cattle holdings. By 
book account, these gentlemen and 
their associates had in round numbers 
just one million and twenty thousand, 
head of cattle grazing on the short 
grass of the northwestern plains. The 
particular business of the distinguished 
party, on this occasion, was to verif} 
by actual ocular evidence, the reports 
that had previously been made to them 
— to satisfy themselves that they had 
a steer on the range, for every steer 
on the books. 

30 



A pulpit-like reviewing stand had 
been constructed on a little eminence 
that overlooked the great basin that 
stretches its cheerless waste from the 
Powder River to the foothills of the 
Rockies. Directly in front of this 
stand, and at right angles to it, ex- 
tended a wire fence as far as the eye 
could reach. On one side lay the ever- 
lasting plain, wnth not an obstruction 
to mar the view, save here and there 
a clump of sage or soap weed, that dap- 
pled its rolling boson?^; and, on the 
other side — the uncounted herd, gath- 
ered there after a "round-up" that 
searched the public domain of four 
states. Here, at this dividing line, the 
tally-keepers took up their positions. 
At the word of command, the gates 
were swung open, and the restless 
beasts, b}' twos and fours, were crowded 
by. Within four hours, the dull, dead 
plain had become transformed into a 
moving mass of life, resembling the 
surface of a troubled sea, with russet 
waves that surged against the sky. 
Presently, all was cattle, and in every 
direction they seemed to blend with 

31 



the landscape. The mighty parade 
was eleven days passing the reviewing 
stand. Every steer was accounted for, 
and the Englishmen returned home 
happy in the knowledge of their vast 
possessions. 

It was common report, however, that 
only 28,000 cattle had been employed 
to work that deception on the noble- 
men, who some months later became 
involved in a sensational scandal as 
the result of their American ranch spec- 
ulations. 

The immensity of a million — the re- 
ally ungraspable proportions of it, is 
the point I wish to make. The 28,000 
head of cattle were made to look like 
a million. The fact is, less than twenty 
thousand cattle, if allowed to range 
themselves on a feed ground will cover 
all the space within the circle of the 
horizon, from rim to rim, and, to the 
inexperienced the number may be any- 
thing from ten thousand to ten hun- 
dred thousand. 

The bulk and volume of a million 
dollars in money, is very difficult of 
appreciation. 

32 



In twenty dollar gold pieces it would 
weigh more than a ton and a half — to 
be exact, just 3,125 pounds. 

In silver dollars it would tip the 
beam at 125,000 pounds, or sixty-two 
and a half tons. 

In five dollar bank notes — set end 
for end — it would make a precious strip 
nearly twenty-four miles long; and, in 
certificates of one dollar, it would fur- 
nish an unbroken ribbon — a veritable 
long green — more than 123 miles in 
length. 

If we go to market with a million 
dollars and exchange it for some com- 
modity of daily use, we will not fail 
to be impressed with its prodigious pur- 
chasing power. 

Suppose we reduce a million dollars 
to bread. That will afford an inter- 
esting measure of its magnitude. At 
the full retail price, our money will 
buy just twenty million loaves, and if 
we get a full count, it will require about 
fifteen thousand ordinary bakery wag- 
ons to make the delivery. 

That much bread would supply every 
man, woman and child in a city of a 



quarter of a million with eighty loves 
apiece — a sufficient amount of the staff 
of life to enable them to withstand a 
siege, or a period of flood and famine, 
for six months. 

The average five cent loaf of baker's 
bread is about ten inches in length, 
and four by five inches across the 
end. or 200 inches cubic volume, and 
sometimes weighs a pound. 

A freight car, thirty feet long, will 
accommodate less than fifteen thousand 
such loaves. So, in order to move these 
twenty millions of loaves by rail, it 
would require a train of solid box cars, 
eight and one-half miles long And, 
if these twenty million loaves were 
stored on a plot of ground 100 feet 
square, and piled up as evently and 
symmetrically as brick and mortar 
might be piled — and solidly over the 
entire area — it would make a novel 
monument that would rise over 230 
feet in the air. This illustration fails 
to convey a fair idea of the huge bulk 
of such a pillar of bread, owing to the 
fact that the average mind perceives 
only the surface outlines of the great 

34 



mass and is not struck with its immense 
proportion. In comparison with many 
of our city sky-scrapers, it would ap- 
pear mean and squatty; but, if these 
loaves could be rearranged in walls con- 
forming in thickness to the walls of 
the Metropolitan Tower — say, an av- 
erage of four feet — our unique bread 
shaft would extend skyward, in doughy 
grandeur, considerably more than a 
quarter of a mile. Again, if this mil- 
lion dollars' worth of bread were 
threaded on a cable, it would make 
an unparalleled "bread line," long 
enough to span the Atlantic from Bos- 
ton to London, or to stretch all the 
weary way from New York to San 
Francisco. 

We are told, in Bible story, that 
Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus, was 
a carpenter, and that he worked at his 
trade in Galilee. Nothing is related 
concerning his special skill. All we 
know is that he was very poor, and it 
is a fair inference that his opportunity 
was limited and his pay irregular. We 
have no reliable information concerning 
the wages carpenters received in that 

36 



day, but I am told that $2.50 a day is 
a fair average wage for such labor at 
this time. Skilled carpenters command 
more money, but they are required to 
put in several months each year in en- 
forced idleness, so the average of $2.50 
per day is a safe basis on v^hich to 
figure. Out of such a wage it would be 
quite impossible for any man to build 
up much of a bank account, and the 
carpenter who, with his family, could 
manage to get along on $1.50, and save 
one whole dollar every day — and keep 
it up indefinitely — would be entitled to 
special recognition as a model of thrift 
and frugality. 

Now, if Joseph could have lived 
until January 1st, of the present year 
of grace, and could have kept his 
health and a steady job, and have 
worked unremittingly every day, down 
through all those ages of years, and 
have received one dollar clear, over and 
above all his expenses — in other words, 
if Joseph could have saved one dollar 
for every day — Sundays and week days 
alike — during all the days of the Chris- 
tian era, and have deposited them in a 

36 



savings account, he would have had to 
his credit in the Banks of Jerusalem 
and Jericho on the first day of Janu- 
ary, 1914, just $698,245. 

Although now very much past his 
prime; bent under the weight of more 
than sixty generations of years, and 
hoary with the frosts of twenty cen- 
turies, the perennial Joseph would still 
be required to patiently persevere — to 
work and skimp and save — until the 
22nd day of September, in the year 
2739, before he could hope to enter 
the millionaire class. 

These illustrations and speculations 
are indulged to impress in some de- 
gree the magnitude of a million, the 
significance — expressed in homely com- 
parisons — of the figures commonly em- 
ployed in this day of "big business," 
to represent the financial power of 
certain men and institutions. I repeat: 
no mind can grasp fully the meaning 
of a million dollars, or a million of 
anything. 

Let no man imagine that the limit- 
ing of the ownership in money to one 
million dollars will work any real hard- 

87 



ship to his just rights or opportunities; 
or that life will become dull and barren 
for him. The average normal man 
should experience little difficulty in 
making ends meet, though required to 
struggle along on the simple interest 
earnings of a million. 

The possession of a million dollars 
means fifty thousand dollars a year — a 
princely annuity — an income which 
makes possible a degree of indepen- 
dence that could not otherwise be ex- 
perienced, under our imperfect social 
system. It means freedom from care; 
liberation from the bondage of unwel- 
come toil, and relief from the monotony 
and everlasting grind of mere exist- 
ence. It means deliverance from the 
pinch and pang of poverty, and im- 
mimity from the wasting worries of 
want. It means ease and luxury and 
pleasing diversion ; carriages and auto- 
mobiles and travel and books. It means 
lands and houses and dress and dia- 
monds. It means position and power 
and popularity; and it means the grati- 
fication of every reasonable desire and 
the realiaztion of every w^orthy ambi- 

38 



tion that money can provide. 

But, with these eagerly sought pos- 
sessions life assumes a different aspect; 
the perspective becomes radically 
changed, and the mind adjusts itself to 
the new angle of view. The owner of 
a million no longer wears his heart on 
his sleeve; no longer touches elbows 
with the motley throng, nor senses the 
strain and stress of their unequal strife, 
and — feeling not — heeds not the suffer- 
ings of his brother! 

When a man acquires control of such 
vast sums of money that he is enabled 
thereby to embarrass or destroy the 
business, or the earning powder of other 
men, there is always the danger that 
he might do so: and, I hold that it is 
entirely within the province of the state 
to establish such safeguards as will 
protect the rights of the great body of 
citizens as against the harmful activi- 
ties of such individuals. 

The owner of a great fortune should 
be required to submit to some reason- 
able handicap, in the struggle for com- 
mercial supremacy, that would tend to 
off-set, in some measure, his financial 

39 



advantage over the man without for- 
tune. This suggestion does not design 
that any undue advantage, or any ad- 
vantage, shall be given one class of 
citizens as against another class, but 
simply this — that the natural rights of 
the individual shall not be ignored, and 
that a fair consideration be accorded 
the least citizen, solely in the interest 
of the preservation of his right to live. 
Man is so constituted that the main- 
tenance of his physical life constantly 
imposes upon him the necessity of sat- 
isfying certain physical wants. Among 
these, food, clothing and shelter may be 
classed as the essential requirements, 
for without any of these no member 
of the state could long continue to live. 
Clothing might be dispensed with dur- 
ing some seasons and in some sections, 
but the conventions of society oppose 
the free exercise of this right by the 
individual ; but food and shelter are in- 
dispensably necessary. These involun- 
tary needs, which in justice are a part 
of every man's birthright — his natural 
inheritance — as free to him as air and 
sunshine, are not to be had by wishing 

40 



for them, or for the asking. Under a 
natural society, the enjoyment of these 
wants would follow as the result of 
each man's personal exertion, and in 
such measure as his tastes would de- 
mand and his industry govern. But, 
under the existing order, these neces- 
sities of every life come only in re- 
sponse to the persuasive quality of the 
coin of the realm — the recognized me- 
dium of exchange. But, this medium 
of exchange is limited and controlled, 
and those who have it in greatest abun- 
dance, rarely employ it in their daily 
transactions, while those who have it 
in least measure, or are entirely desti- 
tute of it, are required in some way to 
find it — the actual money — or die! 
There is no alternative: That is the 
law — the cruel and barbarous injunc- 
tion of this civilization ; get the money, 
or get off the earth. 

It is all well enough to assert solemnly 
that labor means money, and that "there 
is always a living for the man who is 
willing to work," but this is not true. 
The fact is, the opportunities to work are 
less than the number seeking work, and 

W ■ 41 



every day, in this land of plenty, thou- 
sands of honest, anxious, needy appli- 
cants are turned away empty handed, 
and other thousands are physically un- 
able to perform the labor offered them, 
but the daily demands of their living, 
in each case, continue to run against 
them just the same. 

To remedy this condition which 
presses so heavily upon some and so 
light]}' upon others, has been the dream 
and hope of every economist and hu- 
manitarian, who has sought to bring 
about a more equitable adjustment of 
the relations between man and man. 

Those circumstances and conditions 
that operate to make money hard to 
get — even though devoted services are 
eagerly tendered — necessarily make life 
difficult and uncertain ; and, so long as 
life and money are so inseparably re- 
lated as they are under our present 
system, then the men who own vastly 
more money than they need, must bear 
responsibility — at least in large part — ■ 
for the presence of other men who need 
vasth' more money than thev own. 

I am sure, if there were fewer mil- 

42 



lionaires and no multi-millionaires 
there would be a more even distribu- 
tion of the wealth of the people: more 
men would have comfortable fortunes; 
a larger number of deserving people 
would have homes of their own; there 
would be less dependence; and fewer 
children would go hungry to bed. 

It will be contended that all million- 
aires are not of the wolf and vulture 
type that my characterization of them 
would lead many people to believe. 
Probably that is true: let us hope that 
it is. I refer to millionaires as a class, 
and as such, I regard them as a grave 
public danger, but I am also sensible 
of the fact that there may be, here and 
there — Heaven bless them — "good, 
grand souls in this world of shame." who 
notwithstanding their millions, remain 
true to themselves and loyal to their 
fellows — but, I want to say in passing, 
that the millionaires of that sort can 
be counted on the fingers of the left 
hand. 

I still maintain that the man with 
vast sums of money — not earned by 
himself, perhaps — is a menace to the 

43 



rights and opportunities of thousands, 
and the law shouLd provide some sane 
and practical means whereby the man 
of small capital, or no capital, might 
find protection against the avarice and 
the unjust aggression of a rich and 
powerful competitor. 

Tn the town where I passed the 
marble playing period of my boyhood, 
there Hved a much envied youth who 
was known far and wide as the "wiz- 
ard." This boy was not endowed with 
any special genius for "readin', writin', 
or figgers," but, bully gee! he could 
play marbles. He was singularly ac- 
complished in his art, and was capable 
of marvelous execution in a "Boston 
circle." He could place an ordinary 
agate between the thumb knuckle and 
the forefinger of his right hand, and 
direct it anywhere within fifteen feet, 
and nineteen out of twenty times it 
would go with unerring precision to 
the desired spot. He was rarely known 
to lose a game, and when he did it was 
an accident. If he got a shot, it usually 
meant the end of the game. It was 
not an uncommon thing for him to 

44 



start out on a Saturday morning with 
four or five marbles, and return at 
sundown with four or five hundred. 
Every boy in the community had meas- 
ured skill with him, and had failed. 
The "wizard" became so expert and his 
prowess in that respect so well and gen- 
erally known, that his opportunity be- 
came more and more circumscribed. 
(Under the natural conditions, such as 
usually prevail in the commerce be- 
tween marble players, this result was 
inevitable, and of course to be ex- 
pected.) The other boys were not 
courting games with him, and in order 
to induce any of the knowing ones to 
play with him, he was required to 
grant some concession, or to submit to 
some restriction of his rights. This 
handicap was imposed in order that the 
difference in skill might be made up 
in some measure, and thus equalize the 
chances of success. This attitude to- 
wards the "wizard" was prompted by 
the dictate of self preservation, and he 
seemed to appreciate the justice of it. 
When it became known that to play 
with him meant loss, there were very 

k. 45 



few players who could be induced to 
see any fun or profit in the game; and 
the handicap was a proper and legiti- 
mate compromise which suggested it- 
self in the logical order of things. 

Now, let's speculate a moment. 

Suppose the "wizard" had control of 
practically all the marbles — comies, 
two-tickers, crockeries, glassies, etc., 
and the other boys were required 
to get their supplies from him; 
and then were forced to play with 
him, and on his own terms — 
what would have been the outcome? 
One of two results would inevitably 
have followed. The ''wizard" would 
gradually have exhausted the resources 
of the other boys, and have taken over 
all the marbles of the community; or 
some physically capable fellow would 
have found a following, and forced him 
to submit to fair regulation. 

I want to urge the adoption of this 
same sane and civilized method of deal- 
ing with our captains of industry, for 
the protection of the toilers in the 
ranks; in defense of a wise public pol- 
icy, and that the common good might 
be better subserved. 
46 



It matters little, in principle, whether 
we play with marbles or wheat, with 
iron or beef, or oil or bread, but it must 
be borne in mind that a monopoly in 
marbles cannot in any way involve the 
life, liberty or real happiness of any in- 
dividual. 

Society must meet this condition that 
makes a few men rich, while millions 
are in poverty, just as it now meets 
other conditions that produce or invite 
contagion, or other harmful or threat- 
ening consequences. And, it must act 
promptly, too, if those who now live 
are to enjoy any of the benefits. It 
must not delay to moralize or to philos- 
ophize, or to dally with precedent, but 
it must proceed with a sort of ruthless 
expedition, having but a single aim and 
purpose, viz., the common good. 

A safe and rational public policy de- 
mands that limitations be placed upon 
many of the activities of the individual, 
where it appears that his unchecked 
operations would, or might, infringe 
those rights of his fellow claimed to 
be natural and inalienable. The courts 
and the constabulary of the state stand 
back of these regulations of society, 
47 



and the rights of all the people as 
against the wish, .or mischievous pur- 
pose of a few, is the sufficient reason 
and justification. In this way only has 
any real moral advance ever been ac- 
complished in the social relations of 
men. 

No cause, however just and holy, 
ever succeeded simply because it was 
just and holy, but because its defenders 
were willing — if need be — to do and die 
for it. Force, or a show of force, has 
ever been the open sesame to the en- 
joyment of things worth while. Moral 
suasion is good enough in some in- 
stances and under some circumstances, 
but in cases where immediate relief is 
demanded, it is not a dependable and 
efficient means. 

The processes of education are too 
slow. The world cannot wait until 
every man reaches his full moral stat- 
ure — until every heart is civilized. Men 
are dying, while we dream of the mil- 
lennial time when the Golden Rule will 
control every man's attitude towards 
his brother; when Democracy will be 
the recognized religion of every land; 

48 



when the holy principle of the "Single 
Tax" will be universally accepted, or 
when the Collective-ownership of the 
means of production and distribution 
will satisfy the hopes and ambitions of 
men. 

Appeals to the moral side of man — 
to his innate sense of right — have 
never alone sufficed. Simple love of 
justice has rarely ever inspired the 
activities of the rich and powerful. 

And, I declare to you that our polit- 
ical salvation, and the hope for social 
justice, lies in our ability to further and 
properly extend the present police 
power of the state, to cover offenses and 
crimes against the public peace and or- 
der not now recognized by the statute. 

If a man develops smallpox, or any 
other particularly dangerous and known 
to be contagious disease, thereby men- 
acing the health and life of his neigh- 
bors, the law provides a means of pro- 
tection. The unfortunate sufferer is 
quarantined in his home, or he is car- 
ried away to some isolated place and 
there confined until the condition is 
healed or the danger past. 

49 



If a man, without apparent cause, 
begins to talk strangely and to threaten 
his friends and others about him, or to 
charge them — without reason — with 
evil designs upon him, the statute 
makes provision for the protection of 
society against such unfortunates. 

If a broad shouldered, coarse ruffian 
with blood in his eye and murder in his 
heart, sets out on a mission of disorder 
— seeking trouble and making it where 
there was peace before — deliberately 
using his superior physical strength to 
wound and strike down and kill inno- 
cent and helpless people, he will not be 
permitted to continue his saturnalian 
spree without hindrance. The law will 
stop him, and its penalties run hard 
against such offenders. 

If a desperate man lies in wait for 
you, at the entrance of a dark alley and 
there, without provocation on your 
part, brutally "black-jacks" you; all 
right minded people will condemn the 
cowardly assault, and if apprehended, 
the law will mete out swift punishment 
to such an assailant. 

And, if another man, more daring 

50 



perhaps, accosts you and at the point 
of a revolver demands your money and 
other valuables; the law will hunt him 
down. Society resents the act against 
your person, as an attack upon the 
peace and dignity of the state, and has 
framed a criminal statute to fit the 
crime. 

But, if another individual — rich and 
powerful — surfeited with the good 
things of life, far beyond his personal 
needs, but envious of your prosperity, 
and ambitious to rule in certain de- 
partments of trade — if this man seeks 
to ruin you, and to despoil you of your 
property; and does; but instead of a 
bludgeon employs the surer and subtler 
power of money; instead of a pistol, the 
cunning and crafty method of trust 
competition — what protection, pray, 
does society or the state afford? 

You have absolutely no recourse at 
law or elsewhere. The whole commun- 
ity may have knowledge of the crime 
that is being worked against you and 
against the very life of the state, and 
yet they actually look on while you 
are slowly and torturously destroyed, 

5' 



and your family reduced to want — no 
voice is raised to" help you — no officer 
of the law dares to interfere! Why? 

If a man physically superior is not 
justified in using that advantage to 
crush and destroy his business rival who 
may be physically inferior, then by the 
same reasoning and the same moral 
rule, a man of great wealth is not jus- 
tified in using his financial advantage 
to destroy or hamper the business op- 
portunity of his financially weaker com- 
petitor. 

Far worse than plague or pestilence; 
more to be dreaded than the lunatic 
who may run amuck ; or the strong-arm 
brute who cracks a few unoffending 
heads, is the man with surplus millions 
who, under the protection of the law, 
boldly appropriates the product of an- 
other's toil, and filches — without let or 
hindrance — from the hard earned sav- 
ings of the poor. 

The burglar or the highwayman, 
probably driven by hunger to despera- 
tion, who sets out in pursuit of dan- 
gerous plans, stakes his life against 
the property he covets and, in compari- 

52 



son with these public plunderers who 
operate secure from attack, the former 
takes a position of such respectable 
eminence that any relation that might 
be traced would shed lustre upon the 
latter. The burglar wears his sign 
upon his forehead and hazards his right 
to live, while these cruel and craven 
hypocrites, from a clear, cold vantage 
— :with face of Jekyll and heart of Hyde 
— ply their nefarious schemes. The 
average house breaker would disdain- 
fully reject their system and scorn the 
employment of their methods. 

Society must abandon its present 
futile and ineffective practice of symp- 
tom treating, and direct its healing 
agencies to the seat of the disorder that 
is, at this moment, insidiously sapping 
its very vitals. 

It must protect itself against the 
ghouls and jackals, in human flesh, 
that infest the politics of the land and 
whose diabolism penetrates and satur- 
ates through and through the whole 
social fabric; or it will be worse than 
useless to frame statutes for the pun- 
ishment of petty offenders whose acts 

53 



are in truth the unavoidable sequence 
of a policy, which/ to paraphrase an old 
maxim, strains at the effect, but swal- 
lows the cause. 

The important thing that people 
most need, in this countr}-, is not some- 
thing for nothing — profits without in- 
dustry; not charity; not even sym- 
pathy; not special privileges or ad- 
vantages of any kind, but equality of 
opportunity — simple justice. 

Under existing conditions, equality of 
opportunity is impossible. This most 
precious boon of democracy may never 
be realized until, by some device of the 
law, the marauding millionaire is in- 
terrupted in his ruinous course, and is 
forced to respect the rights of the 
masses. 

In the interest of a peaceful working- 
out of the great social and industrial 
problems that are now pressing for so- 
lution, I have made bold to outline a 
plan and to indicate a method — crude, 
perhaps; imperfect, to be sure, but con- 
ceived in a Jeffersonian spirit of the 
square deal. I offer it as a remedy 
for most of the ills in our economic 

54 



S3"stem of which we have reason to 
complain — a sufficient and workable 
plan; adapted to present needs; fitted 
to the purposes of free government, 
and, in my judg"ment capable of prac- 
tical and beneficial exploitation. 

If I had a million dollars, this mes- 
sage which T have so imperfectly pre- 
sented to you, would be carried by abler 
spokesmen to ever}^ receptive mind be- 
tween the two oceans; and, if earnest 
advocacy of the right ever found ex- 
pression in the statutes, then the prop- 
osition I have here laid down, respect- 
ing the fixing of a just limitation upon 
the individual ownership of money, 
would become the law in this land. 

I apprehend that there would be op- 
position to such a law — no doubt many 
objections would be urged against it — 
but no man will rightfully take excep- 
tion to its impartial fairness. It will 
be borne in mind that the reform I 
urge does not contemplate seizure or 
confiscation; it does not threaten the 
rich with despoliation, nor the poor 
with increased burdens, and it cannot 
be tortured into an attempt to appro- 

55 



priate the products of honest industry 
to the uses and -purposes of the idle 
and the indolent. 

The success of such a measure might 
involve certain constitutional changes, 
but no man will plead that such a 
statute would offend the moral sense; 
or that it would interfere with the 
rights, or abridge the opportunity of 
the citizen; or that it would hamper 
individual effort or destroy personal 
initiative. 

The man of small capital, and the 
man of no capital, certainly would not 
decry the enactment of a law that con- 
templated such a just and reasonable 
restraint upon money-getting, but on 
the contrary, they would give it their 
endorsement and support, and for many 
reasons, but chiefly because the aver- 
age man's ambition and hope for for- 
tune is far inside of a million dollars. 

The normal man of large capital 
would offer no serious objection to such 
a measure, because he would recognize 
its justice, and he would have occasion 
to rejoice in the fact that a good rea- 
son was now afforded him to slacken 

56 



a killing pace, and he might devote 
possibly his best years to some really 
worthy and useful pursuit. 

The multi-millionaire would regard 
such a movement with a degree of com- 
placence and a sense of relief. The suc- 
cess of such a law could do him no 
violence. He would still have his mil- 
lions, and he would enjoy the uniq^ue 
distinction of having "gone the limit," 
so to speak, in the accumulation of 
dollars; and he would also have the 
satisfaction of knowing that he was 
the last of his kind. 

"Big Business" would not suffer, but 
instead would be ^placed upon a safer 
and firmer basis, because such enter- 
prises would no longer represent the 
money-forced dominance and dictation 
of one man, or one set of men, who 
might at will arbitrarily force the price 
of labor and likewise fix the cost of 
commodities. Brain and brawn would 
quite naturally come in for larger rec- 
ognition and tact and talent would find 
fairer recompense. In any event "big 
business" is not the product of either 
the genius or the labor or the capital 

57 



of rich men, but It Is the product of the 
mental power, the muscle and the 
money of thousands of work-people and 
small investors whose skill and savings 
are exploited by the rich. 

Under my proposed reform of the 
existing order, respecting the amassing 
of private fortunes, not less than two 
thousand men — each receiving the max- 
imum of $50,000 — would share the large 
profits of an institution like the United 
States Steel Corporation, instead of 
only five men. 

Tn the oil industry another two 
thousand or more men would divide 
the cream of the proceeds instead of 
only three men. 

The sugar industry would annually 
contribute a fortune to each of a thou- 
sand or more men, where it now en- 
riches but a few. 

The vast smelting interests of the 
country would serve to flood with in- 
creased sunshine and greater abund- 
ance many thousands of homes, in- 
stead as at present serving only to en- 
dow and perpetuate the financial prow- 
ess of a single family. 

58 



Five men control the great meat 
packing industry of this country, and 
this little coterie of money-kings manip- 
ulate — entirely within their own dis- 
cretion, and to their personal profit and 
aggrandisement — the price the farmer 
shall receive for his live stock, and also 
the price the consumers of the land 
shall pay for the meat products. Such 
an assault upon the rights and liber- 
ties of the people would be impossible 
under the equitable plan I propose. 

Many forms of crime against the 
State would practically disappear, 
owing to the fact that the conditions 
which invite such corrupt practices 
would have ceased to exist. For ex- 
ample: the profit would be taken out 
of bribery, and the representative of 
the people would become more trul}' 
representative. No individual would 
have at his command unearned fortune 
with which to dower the palm of 
traitors — thus both the incentive to 
and the purpose of bribery would be 
largely removed. 

These are but a few of the conse- 
quent and incidental blessings that 

59 



would surely flow from the enactment 
of a law which would place a reason- 
able and just check to the destructive 
commercial and industrial activities of 
the excessively rich. 

No man would contend that such a 
law would impoverish anyone, or that 
it would take from honest toil its fair 
reward. 

On the contrary, such a limitation 
upon the individual ownership of 
mone}-, as I have suggested, would do 
no violence to property or property 
rights. It would neither destroy nor 
discourage business, endanger credit or 
stifle competition; and, it would in no 
v/ise menace the just powers of capi- 
tal, or infringe in any degree the rights 
of labor. It would not provoke a tear 
in all the land, or anguish a single 
breast, or visit upon any home fore- 
bodings or loss! 

But such a law — in the name of jus- 
tice and humanity — would operate to 
curb the ruthless sway of financial 
despots by fixing a definite barrier be- 
yond which the tyranny of money 
could not go; and, by setting a just 

60 



limit to greed and extortion, and a rea- 
sonable restraint upon rapacity and 
plunder, it would interpose its saving 
arm between the sordid master of 
money and the helpless victim of his 
cruel machination. 

In short, such a law would retire 
from the field of competitive endeavor 
that man only whose personal control 
of vast wealth gives him an artificial 
advantage over his financially less for- 
tunate fellow, and thus the difference 
in opportunity would be made up in 
some measure to the man without a 
fortune, and, as a result there would 
be secured to industry, frugality and 
honorable thrift something more nearly 
approximating an even break in the 
struggle for existence, and there would 
be guaranteed to the citizen a larger 
enjoyment of his declared to be inalien- 
able right to Life, Liberty and the 
Pursuit of Happiness. 



Let^s Civilize 

The Marriage Laws 

BY 

RICHARD D. KATHRENS 
Bound in Cloth Prepaid $1.50. 

THE MESSAGE OF 

A Nan Who Does Not Mince. 

A Novel Conception of Marriage, 

A new Angle on the Divorce Question. * 
An Exalted Tribute to Woman, and an 
Eloquent Plea for the Child to be. 

An unanswerable argument in support of the 
writer's position that; THE WIFE SHOULD 
HAVE FINAL POWER IN ALL DIVORCE 
ACTIONS. 



A Book For 



'The MATED and Married 
,The Married and UN-MATED 
lTh« DIVORCED, and 
I Those who should Divorce, and 
Those Contemplating Matri- 
mony. 

The Burton Publishing Company, 

PUBLISHERS AND BOOKSELLERS. 

609 East 9th St. Kansas City. Mo. 



WOMANHOOD 

AND ITS 

DEVELOPMENT 



A TREATISE ON ADOLESCENCE DESIGNED 
FOR THE YOUNG WOMAN 



Embracing the Fundamental Principles of 

Biologp, Phjfaiologg and Reproduction, 

Together with Personal Hygiene 



LUELLA Z. RUMMEL, Ph. B.; M. D.; D. 0. 

Professor of Embryology, Materia Medica, 
Hygiene and Sanitary Science, 
Medical Department of Kan- 
sas City University. 

ILLUSTRATED 



A handaome 12nio of about 200 pages, printed 
on good book paper, sold by all book deal- 
ers or sent prepaid on receipt of price. 



Clotk • . . - - $1.50 

BURTON PUBLISHING CO. 
509 E. 9th St., Kansas City, Mo. 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ] 



013 732 125 7a 



